Saturday, November 04, 2006

New Financial Thread

Since everyone used the "Announcements" thread for discussion anyway, and since that thread has now grown to over 200 comments, we need to tie a knot in that one and start anew.

So please continue the current discussion in here.

Thanks,

NBBCOF

72 comments:

New BBC Open Forum said...

Derrick,

It's apparent to me that you are indeed sincere in your beliefs and opinions, and I respect you for that. I also appreciate the civil attitude with which you express yourself. You have made a valuable contribution to these discussions and are welcome to comment as you see fit.

It's a shame that we've reached the point where we can't trust our church leaders. It's the way the information seems to always be always predigested and presented that I think people object to. It's my understanding as well that the information presented this week regarding the credit card receipts seemed to pass muster.

But after the 9/24 meeting and the tactics in evidence there, can you not see why people are naturally skeptical now? How did the people at that meeting know that they were examining all the credit card receipts for all the credit cards the church has? Does anyone even know how many of those cards are floating around? Did they see the actual credit card statements or just a stack of receipts?

It's not the people examining the evidence that people seem to be questioning. It's the way the evidence is controlled and presented. What is called for is an independent investigation where a disinterested third party (or parties) goes and obtains the evidence independently. At this point, I might even suggest a private investigator. What isn't going to ever satisfy people, especially after the 9/24 information meeting, is the leadership controlling what information is open to examination. There's a clear conflict of interest here.

NASS

stillwaitingandwatching said...

REPOST FROM PREVIOUS THREAD....

Essentially saying the same thing as NASS, but I believe it *is also* with the people who are doing the reviewing...here is what I said..

Derrick,

This is a sincere question and thought for you...why do you think that "the true testimony of 19 Godly people is viewed as having no value here?" This should show that some have lost all trust in our leadership...men that once we highly regarded in the church...Phil Weatherwax for example, yet, through this crisis in our church we have seen sides of these Godly men that we never knew existed. You have a different perspective being a deacon and privy to information that others may not be privy to. But, it appears that overall trust has been lost with our leadership. We trusted the pastor's search committee to represent those who elected them, and it appears they possibly had their own interest at heart in their decision. Also, we trusted our pastor to lead his sheep, then in the midst of this crisis, he blasts the very people he is to be leading, to another church, nonetheless. We have had staff members that we have loved with ALL OF OUR HEARTS be asked to leave and come up with a reason to present to the congregation that would not make any waves. Then a committe was put in place for us to be able to ask questions of and it was comprised of some of the very same people whom we have lost trust in...Harry Smith and Chuck Taylor...is there any committee these two men AREN'T on?? Please Derrick, look at it from our perspective...some have us have been told by these very men, "If you don't like it, leave." And yet, we're supposed to trust them in all things. Please help me understand. Thank you.

10:46 AM, November 04, 2006

New BBC Open Forum said...

Looks as if several people are getting fed up with the "Bellevue Boys Club" running the church. It's about time. It's funny, as someone who's relatively new to Bellevue, I don't know a lot of people, but when I saw the list of deacons I wondered why there seemed to be so many with the same last names (not the common names which may or may not be related to each other, but the not so common names which represent obvious family connections).

And now I see that most of the committees at Bellevue as well as the boards of directors for BBC, LWF, the BF, ECS, and even MABTS are comprised in great part of the same little group of men. Why is that? Where are all the unsung "common" men who warm the seats every Sunday but whose names we never hear? Where are the women? Working in the nursery? Cooking the Wednesday night suppers? Barefoot and pregnant at home? This is getting more like The Stepford Wives all the time!

While the PD stuff is part of the problem, this little core of rich men running things is what I've perceived to be a bigger problem all along. Steve Gaines' football background, his comparing himself to the head coach of the "team," the same exclusive group of men in all the leadership positions and on the boards of directors of all these related organizations -- it's a pattern. It's the good ol' boys network in action, and it ain't pretty. Bellevue has a big problem, and it's not all Rick Warren's fault. Sadly, it's ours for ever letting this happen.

NASS

New BBC Open Forum said...

Moved from the "Announcements" thread:

WOUNDEDANDBLEEDING said...

MKW said...

God is in control and can handle those in leadership over us without us
_________________

Greetings to you in the precious, healing name of Jesus.

I know the LORD uses people, places, and things to bring his will to pass.

I personally love the story of David, as a shepherd boy.

David was called of the LORD and bold in his calling.

When he saw that no one else would step forth to face that taunting Giant Goliath, he stood forth, with but a simple sling in hand and flung the pebble that brought Victory that day!

If the LORD can use a little boy, If he can use a sling slot, If he can use a pebble, to bring HIS WILL to pass, then that`s enough evidence for me to know he will use whom he chooses, what he chooses to do as he chooses, just when he chooses.

It`s not that he needs help from anyone but more that he delights in using his creations to show himself strong through their weaknesses.

When I think on this, I just get so excited!!!!

GOD bless you!
Sister Pam

11:37 AM, November 04, 2006

I love my church said...

NASS,

Do you know what the little men you describe who aren't as gifted and talented are allowed to do?

Like Dr. Gaines daddy, they can't do much, but boy they sure can "ush." Bless their hearts.

If we listen closely to what is said by the in-crowd, the disdain for the regular Bellevue member is obvious.

IWTK said...

I join Derrick in signing off this blog for ever. It is obvious that this has gotten way of hand and no amount of human truth will prevail. It has been wisely said that you can not reason with unreasonable people.

Please continue to work through the proper channels to seek the truth. As I have said time and time again, half-truths and un-founded allegations are dangerous and sinful. Go directly to those who know. Only listen to those with first-hand knowledge of a situation.

If there are issues, let's work together to get through them. Public hangings are not necessary.

Going forward, I will spend my time on my knees praying. If you care for Bellevue, I pray you will continue to do the same. Get off this blog and pray.

When you are tempted to "rubber-neck at the traffic accident" that has become the public display of our church business, pray. When you are tempted to slander another Brother, pray. When you are tempted to back-bite someone, pray. When you are tempted to "spread discord among the brethren", pray. When you are tempted to spread a rumor, pray. When you are tempted to post a comment about someone, ask youself, "would I say this to their face?", and then pray.

All of this will take a super-natural, God-breathed miracle. To quote from the movie, Facing the Giants, "I am going to prepare the field for the rain".

May God have mercy on us all.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps someone could present a "family tree" of sorts for the church, mabts, bf, lwf, ecs, and so on. It could clarify some things for many.

*

Josh Tucker said...

To no one in particular,

Relational ties or connections exist in all facets of life. The only time it is condemned is when the appearance of privilege rears its head. However, I ask you, is this alone enough to condemn someone and to cast doubt on a person's character or motive?

The conspiracy theories are alive and well too. Unfortunately, the problem with a conspiracy theory is that you can always keep it alive no matter what information comes forth because there is the suggestion or presumption of an additional hidden layer of information that is not being revealed. The very nature of a conspiracy theory makes it difficult to disprove to the skeptic because any information coming forward regarding the truth of the matter is through the so-called "gatekeepers of the truth", and these "gatekeepers" themselves cannot be trusted because they potentially are hiding or have been accused of hiding information relevent to the truth. Consequently, a conspiracy theory feeds on itself through a closed-loop logic system and a never ending paranoia regarding the possiblity of the unknown or hidden truth.

Unless the deacons involved with handling this matter have specific and serious issues related to their character, why is either their conduct or their credibility in doubt?

The level of unreasonableness is rising drastically in this forum, and I'm not sure if some of the positions expressed by individuals here can or should be perceived as valid concerns regarding the state of affairs at Bellevue.

Moreover, content of the discourse is beginning take on revolutionary overtones with regard to undermining or overthrowing the status quo at Bellevue. Seriously, I sometimes have the perception that I am in another time period watching the proletariat (the self-titled simple Bellevueites) take on the suspect system of power controlled by the bourgeoisie (the rich, privileged "old-boys club).

Let's tone it down a bit.

And remember to follow 1 Timothy 5:19.

westtnbarrister said...

Josh,

You make good points and I largely agree. The tone of the discourse has definitely changed.

But don't you think that tells us something important? I hear that tone not just in this forum. I hear it at church and out in the community. I think we ignore the feelings expressed here at the peril of our church.

That people are openly and vigorously questioning the leaders should surprise no one. That questioning will only grow worse the longer the conflict drags on.

Someone said their faith in the leadership has been shattered. I think that is a more serious problem than misuse of credit cards.

I'm with you, I hope we can raise the level of the discourse. I also hope our leaders are paying attention because the people are growing restless.

choice_is_yours said...

No matter what happens, Jesus still died for our sins and we still KNOW for SURE that we have a place in Heaven.

If any one is doubting this, please feel free to speak up and all the posters here will reassure you.

None of the people posting here (no matter how great their disagreement with each other) have lost any of their faith in Jesus as Lord and Savior.

I believe that the way out of this situation is through Jesus and revival.

Everyone, please take 24 hours off from this place and focus on Sunday at Appling.

Moderator, please turn comments off for 24 hours.

Anonymous said...

mkw said:

"...a home that is suitable for the entertaining and hospitality required of the Parkers' position at BBC..."

Hmm, now just where is that requirement in the Bible?

Just wondering.

praiseteam said...

NASS

Can you hear me singing in the choir behind you? I just sang three choruses of Handel's Messiah to a standing ovation.

New BBC Open Forum said...

praiseteam,

Press here.

New BBC Open Forum said...

choice_is_yours, mkw,

I agree we all need a break from time to time, and I would encourage everyone to do just that. However, because of work schedules or other obligations, some people only have a day or two each week during which they have the time to come here and participate. I would hate to arbitrarily turn off the ability to comment and lock someone out who may not have another opportunity to participate. Also, we have new people dropping in all the time, and if comments are turned off, some may think we're shut down permanently and not return. Not that some don't want the forum to be shut down permanently anyway, but I digress.

So everyone who desires to take a break, please just choose the day or amount of time you need to be away and by all means, take a needed rest. Then return refreshed and ready to contribute.

Everyone have a wonderful Lord's Day tomorrow!

NBBCOF

Will McKay said...

Why did RE need to edit his letter?

What happened to the part about "putting down his sword?"

New BBC Open Forum said...

straining gnats wrote:

"Why did RE need to edit his letter?

"What happened to the part about "putting down his sword?"


You'd need to ask him. He didn't explain, and I didn't ask. I didn't think it was any of my business.

NBBCOF

ezekiel said...

Josh says....

Relational ties or connections exist in all facets of life. The only time it is condemned is when the appearance of privilege rears its head. However, I ask you, is this alone enough to condemn someone and to cast doubt on a person's character or motive?

Josh, I think the real problem people are having with all this is that the ties you speak of appear to
be stronger than our ties as brothers and sisters. That all seems to get started with "love it or leave it" and seeing our brothers and sisters being treated shabbily all in the name of unity. Whose unity? The church or the boy's club?

NASS...... We are all upset but storming the fort probably needs to give way to a dogged determination to do something about
it. The music, sizes of houses, timing of changes and "murmuring" are the smoke and as long as the debate stays in that court the boy's club may be able to stamp it out or out last it. I am sure the reserves they have give them a lot of time to wait for the average church member to cool down. The effect of all these average members leaving to go elswhere just quickens the process. that is why we hear it so often. The new members don't have the investment the "leavers" have. The example we can look at is West Jackson where you already heard that they lost 50%. Do we really need that kind of house cleaning?

I think a lot of people are beginning to focus on the fire that threatens us now. We need to make a concerted effort to reach out to those that have been asked to leave and somehow get them back in our church. I would use the argument that you have too much invested and too much love to walk away the first time a Deacon tells you to leave it. Getting together and developing a list of Deacons that have told anyone this should be put together and broadcast. Do we as a church want Deacons serving that would suggest that any and I mean any member should leave?

Then we need to look at the administration and approach it the same way. Start putting together eye witness accounts of requests to leave. Lets hear and document the details about all the BFC teachers that have been pressured to leave. Remember, truth and light.

I am absolutly not advocating a church "revolt". However if we use the family idea, the first thing that has to go is the "get out if you don't like it". This is an absolute afront to any commandment to love that is found in the Bible.

The last thing that I would do is leave at just the suggestion I should leave. I would prefer to stand and tell you this is where my membership is, this is where I have chosen to be a part of the church body. This is where I have invested my time and my love and I am not going anywhere. The only way you are going to get me out of here is Matt 18 and haul me before the church. And that may be more embarrassing for you than me.

We also need to become active by offering to serve in any position we can to show love to anyone that needs it.

Revival not Revolt/Rebellion. It really needs to start with truth and light.

pulpitwatcher said...

This post was left on the previous page before it got too many responses.

I was wondering if anyone knows if this has been answered yet anywhere?

deceivedagain said...
Derrick,
In a recent post of yours you stated the following:

Yes. This was confirmed by examination by Chip Freeman, David Coombs, Wayne Vander Steeg, Harry Smith, Aubery Earnhart, Perrin Jones, Mark McDaniel, John Hyneman, Everette Hatcher, Chuck Taylor, Steve Tucker, Jeff Arnold, Scott Foster, Mark Spiller, Bart Berretta, Mike Hobday, Bryan Miller, Jim Barnwel, and Gene Howard.

Question: Can you contact each one of these men and find out if they were awared of multiple credit cards in use by Steve Gaines when they were shown only bills from one card?

10:44 AM, November 04, 2006

ezekiel said...

Has anyone read John 9 lately? The man born blind could see and when he could see, the Pharisees questioned him, did not like his answer and banned him from the church. Maybe we begin to see.......

Does Mark D. have the authority to tell a Deacon that hes is "kicked off" the Deacon body?

cjesusnme said...

Ezekiel,

Well stated and if we, as a congregation, are to vote in new deacons how is it that one man has the right to let them go or dismiss them?

phil413 said...

M Wilmouth,
I have read in one of your earlier posts about you being tired of people stating things that are not facts on this blog.
Is that not what you yourself have done in your last post? Have you talked to Mark Sharpe and asked him if he would be embarrassed? I think not. You must be a heart-reader to know his heart in this way. Mark has said many times that he would welcome the opportunity. The pastor has spoke though, and said Mark will not have a platform at BBC. This is really not the issue, as I can't understand why we as a congregation vote on accepting deacons but it only takes one man to "fire them".
Phil. 4:13
David Matlock

ezekiel said...

MKW....

If as you seem to think, the man's laundry is dirty maybe the best way to handle it is haul it out front, expose it to a little truth and light and help him get his robe a little lighter shade of grey. I would bet that the next time anyone with a dirty robe started hurling mud that it would give him cause to pause.

If on the other hand, his laundry appears to be a little cleaner than we have been told, we can identify the exact spot to to apply the truth and light.

We keep hearing that we can't handle the truth, that information is being withheld to keep from embarassing a sinner. How do we identify the sinner without the information?

Ephesians 5:26-27

Bereans said...

Chuck Tayor told Mark Sharpe that he hadn't "earned the right" to look at the credit card records. What does that mean? How does one earn the right? What have Chuck's 19 men done to earn the right to be the ones who get to review the records that are given them to review? Did they pledge their 100% support of Steve? Did they promise not to ask questions about the other credit card? Did they promise not to ask about the charges related to shoes and birthday parties?

I will not be satisfied until Mark Sharpe reviews the records. I wish Chuck would tell him how to "earn the right." Mark is the one who started asking the questions, he should be the one to bring this to resolution, not Steve's hand picked elders.

phil413 said...

M Wilmouth,
I praise you for your last paragraph. It was very well stated and certainly what we should all strive for. However to say that Steve Gaines has Mark's best interest at heart is a little presumptious, I doubt if Joseph called Mary "Hezbollah" or told her she was "sending people to hell". These statements don't seem to come from the mouth of a man that has a lot of love and concern for Mark Sharpe.
Phil. 4:13

Truth Hunter said...

Tonight why didn't Harry definitively state, "Dr. Gaines never used the credit cards for personal purchases?" All he said was the credit cards are okay.

Dr. Gaines denied EVER using them for personal purchases. Was that true or was that a lie? We still don't know.

I want to believe every word I heard but I felt like he parsed his words in that explanation.

We also don't know how many credit cards he had access to. I am going to ask the committee how many he had.

whynotask said...

It seems that many will not be satisfied if the Administration says all monies concerning credit cards is ok, have been checked, and no-NOT ONE- charge personel has been made by Steve Gaines.
On the other hand the accusers will not be allowed to see all of the records because of the sensitive nature of these records.
We have a deacon that states if any of this is true what difference would it make? What difference does it make? I guess to some it would not matter. To us it matters. It appears to me more clearly now as to why the four people climbed the fence.They were desperate to close down the questions. I have seen no other signs from these four to reconcile with Mark Sharp now that things appear to be in their favor. At least from all that has been said here.
I see little Love from Steve Gaines. Watch the DVD when Pastor Steve preached at Dr. Rodgers Funeral and see if you see any Love in his tone or in his eyes. Can you think of any time he has shown any brokenness when preaching. If you think of one please point it out so I can see it. I would love to see for myself.
Real Heartfelt Love without HE-HE's or you-know's. He is a Good Preacher of God's Word but he lacks a great deal in the people department. I think that the dismissal of Jim Whitmire was a great disgrace for Bellevue and any member that thinks it was good is not a part of Bellevue in a real sense. New members not included in the above statement. Well, I could go on but the only point I want to make is Love & Truth. Brother Steve needs a dose of one for sure.
With all do respect & the love of Jesus.

I love my church said...

whynotask,

Do you really think he is a good preacher of the word?

I think his sermons are shallow. This series on the family any Christian parent married 5 years could have written. I believe he could do much better. For whatever reason he doesn't exegete the word. He takes a scattered verse or two, sprinkles in a few anecdotes and jokes, hits the hot buttons evangelicals agree with and then begs people to come to Jesus. These are not the deep biblical sermons we at Bellevue are accustomed to.

If he is going to preach someone else's sermons, I recommend he rip off Doctors Lee, Pollard and Rogers. Those were sermons.

I agree with you about love. You never see it or feel it. Have you been in a room when he enters? He has a rockstar air about him. He calls attention to himself. Dr. Rogers was so humble. The contrast between them as men is striking.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Report on Sunday evening (11/5) "Information Meeting"

Steve Gaines announced that Harry Smith and David Coombs were going to speak.

Harry Smith began by saying that he was going to report on the progress made by the Communications Committee in the three weeks since they'd been formed. He told about a meeting this past week where an undisclosed number of people met to go over the credit card receipts. Linda Somebody (Garce? Garth? something like that) was present to explain the process to them. They went over "all the receipts for every credit card." After going over the receipts, those present concluded everything was in order.

The pastor and his wife ran into "the former CFO" and his wife in a restaurant this week and "had a nice visit." The former CFO (never named, but he meant Craig Parker) met with Steve Gaines later in the week, and they had a really positive meeting, etc.

Then the deacons met at 3:00 today (11/5), and they rolled out the credit card receipts again. Steve Gaines was there and told them he wanted to "get this behind me." One of the deacons reportedly said, "We don't want to see them, Pastor!"

{Standing ovation}

One or two of them did ask to see them "so they could honestly say to people who asked that they'd seen them with their own eyes and could assure them that everything was okay." (Again, that's paraphrased but close.)

So the "one or two" deacons spent some time reviewing the receipts, and after that the deacons, "unanimously, 100%," voted that they were "completely satisfied" that the credit card records were in order.

{Applause}

There have been about 15 of the committee questionaires returned, and they've talked with or met with the people who submitted the questions. The committee members have compiled a list of FAQs along with a statement, and they're mailing a copy of that to every member of the church later this week.

Beginning next Sunday (11/12), the committee members are going to be in one of the rooms off the hallway next to the fellowship hall between the hours of 8:30 and 9:30 on Sunday mornings, and people can come in and meet them and ask questions or just talk with them.

The deacons were going to continue their meeting after this evening's service to further address some undisclosed issues.

Then we stood and were dismissed.

Nothing more was said about David Coombs speaking.

New BBC Open Forum said...

i love my church,

This morning Dr. Gaines commented that he had gotten some statistics about singles from Tim Shelton but that the words [of his sermon] were his own.

NASS

I love my church said...

NASS,

"This morning Dr. Gaines commented that he had gotten some statistics about singles from Tim Shelton but that the words [of his sermon] were his own."

I heard him say that. If I were him I wouldn't want anyone to know I wrote that sermon. I am suggesting HE SHOULD use other people's sermons because these are stinkers. They aren't wrong. He isn't preaching lies. He just isn't preaching at all. They are the expositional equivalent of a paint-by-number painting. I believe he has been trained to do much better. Some people are impressed by a slick delivery. I'm not. I'm impressed by content. His sermons are short on biblical content.

Anonymous said...

I was very disappointed that tonight's report was so empty.

Mark Sharpe,

I have some questions for you.

When Harry Smith said that they had been wanting to talk to Craig Parker for quite a while I almost came out of my skin. He made it sound like they just been missing each other and were finally able to visit. Is this a reasonable interpretation of what he said and how he stated it?

Also, I for one need to know for sure if what Harry said about Craig is comprehensively accurate. Harry said that Craig "had no concerns, everything was fine, there was no problem there." Harry did not specify what Craig had no concern about or what was fine but in the context of the overall, it seemed that Craig was ok with the financial side of things. Mark, you have said things that have led me to believe that Craig had legitimate concerns over something and the only way he would meet to discuss them was to have particular people in the room and have it recorded. Hearing it from you, "the deal", sounded bigger to me than what Harry said tonight.

Something is not right here. Did Craig just give up and make up? I believe Harry is telling the truth as he knows it. However, Mark you have said things that I've heard with my own ears that make me believe there is still more to the story. Perhaps I misunderstood.

Please set me straight on all this.

Is there more to Craig's list that he brought up this time?

Is there a problem that Craig still needs to resolve with the Pastor and or Mark D or the church? Or is it time to put Craig Parker's concerns on the resolved list?

Forgive me Craig, you may certainly answer for yourself here but again my understanding is that you are fairly tired of all this.

*

gopher said...

Perhaps he needs to "get this behind him" because Bellevue is hosting the Tennesse Baptist Convention in Memory of Adrian Rogers on Nov 13 :

http://www.tnbaptist.org/CalendarEvent.asp?eventid=902&cat=admin&subcat=events06and


That is why he wanted the deacons to "see" the credit card information and why the deacons are staying until all is resolved.
He doesn't want just "We don't want to see them, Pastor!" as he wants to be cleared by the deacons of all charges and not have to face his accusers.

Outsider said...

What exactly do you want your pastor to do? If he kneels before you and says I'm sorry even though he has evidence of no wrongdoing, you will still consider him haughty or proud. You aren't "entertained" by his sermon, and you get a bad "feel" when he walks in the room because he doesn't have the sweet spirit of Dr. Rogers. He preaches "other people's" sermons and it's not deep like you are so accustomed. You want to be fed until you are informationally obese and practically a puffed-up spiritual couch potato. Why not bring score cards to the service so you can rate the performance of everything - oh nevermind - you have this blog to "score" everything after it's over.

If you want to be happy with your church - obey the Lord and stop looking for signs of trouble. Get on your face before the Lord first and be broken instead of judging by appearances the true heart of the pastor. Cry out to God and confess your sin with the same passion you are chasing after your pastor's perceived sins. On one comment, I read that someone wished that they had a pastor that was like Jesus (insinuating that Dr. Gaines is not). Wow. I can hear the Pharisees saying, "AMEN"

As far as the sermons of other preachers go, I will quote Dr. Rogers from an "out of town" preaching engagement I heard him at: "If the bullets fit in your gun, shoot them." Obviously he had no problem using other people's materials, and again, you hold your present pastor to a different standard.

After all the meetings and all the proof, will you be happy with anything other than his dismissal? HONESTLY, WILL YOU?

Anonymous said...

Go ahead outsider. Don't hold back. Really, get it off your chest.

Derrick Calcote said...

Guys,

First let me say this. I love you all. If I have offended in some point I ask your forgiveness, and to the degree to which any of you have offended me, you are indeed forgiven.

My conviction has not changed that I do not need to participate in answering questions here anymore. For every question I can answer for a sincere truth seeker, my words may cause others to stumble.

But anyone with a sincere question, PLEASE e-mail me. I will do my very very best to get you a true and correct answer.

Or meet with the communications committee, or send them questions. Our Lord is using their ministry in a mighty way.

There are things being said here this very night that are simply not true, so please... before you sew discord among the brethren, if you have a question, try to get it answered the the legitimate channels that your church has provided for you.

I am here as your servant, as are the member of our communications committee.

In His service and yours,

Derrick Calcote
dcalcote@msn.com

I love my church said...

Outsider,

The church at large is suffering from a lack of expositional preaching. Our pulpits have been turned into places for nice conversations about problems and felt-needs. Today Dr. Gaines tiptoed all around the sin of living together before marriage. He didn't want to seem harsh or mean. The Bible says that is sin. Sin! It is crystal clear. Our church is accustomed to sound no-holds-barred preaching. We no longer get that. For me, this is a much bigger issue than credit cards and hopping fences. He is trying to appeal to the unsaved instead of equiping and edifying the saints. That is his big mistake.

Lwood said...

Gopher Said
In the tithing blog Gopher gave the compensations for several at lwf and bellevue foundation. I went to the site and downloded but did not find the amounts given. Can Gofer expand on this issue...It was verry interesting to see the amount that went to ECS.
Check it out!!!!!!!!

stillwaitingandwatching said...

Just some points for clarification:

Outsider,

I just wanted to clarify that you have mistakenly taken Dr. Rogers' quote out of context and didn't complete what he said when you wrote:
"'If the bullets fit in your gun, shoot them.'" Obviously he had no problem using other people's materials, and again, you hold your present pastor to a different standard."

Here is the exact quote: "If what I preach fits your gun, then shoot it. But use your own powder." He was making reference to pastors who would tell him they borrowed from HIS sermons. Just to clarify that Dr. Rogers didn't borrow from others.

Also, NASS, Linda Glance is Dr. Gaines' admin. assistant. She is not in the financial office. Just to clarify.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Okay, let me try that again!

The name I tripped over was Linda Glance, Dr. Gaines' Administrative Assistant. Am I correct now? My apologies to Ms. Glance for the error(s).

NASS

stillwaitingandwatching said...

NASS,

I SOOOO wanted to insert your "applause" link in here, but I have no clue how to do that....SO....imagine a "press here" link. LOL

New BBC Open Forum said...

sw&w,

Thank you. E-mail me and I'll tell you how to do that.

NASS

Outsider said...

Stillwaitingandwatching said,

"Here is the exact quote: "If what I preach fits your gun, then shoot it. But use your own powder." He was making reference to pastors who would tell him they borrowed from HIS sermons. Just to clarify that Dr. Rogers didn't borrow from others."

Thank you for the clarification on the whole quote. It was what I heard and wrote down from several years ago (late 80's) at an evangelism conference. It doesn't necessarily suggest, as you said, that Dr. Rogers didn't borrow from other sermons, it just gives evidence that he was not opposed to the use of his or another's material.

In reality, it is immaterial. The issue is that this is not an issue, it(the suggestion that Dr. Gaines doesn't prepare his own sermons) is just another speculation used to attck the present leadership and expand the rumor mill.

New BBC Open Forum said...

Moved from "Prayer is the Key" thread...

junior 5432 said...

Just a thought but why are credit card charges so sensitive. I have heard many here say that they are private and sensitive. I just do not understand that statement.If there had been no impropriety what difference would it make? Are we worried about the IRS or the congregation. Those who have said things are OK are the same ones who are on every committee and board. What they may think is usual and customary may be acceptable to those in power but would they be OK's by the vast majority of the church? For example many businesses allow entertainment of customers and potential employees. Many also allow somethings to be charged to their cards thqat would not be appropriate for a SBC Church to allow. Some also allow the employee to charge personal things on credit cards but must reimburse the company. Also tonight Harry Smith said that
David Coombs was in aggreement with him and that he would say so. It was quite apparant to me that he did not go to the platform to speak nor did he even stand up. With all the "Info" they were given why was he not there to speak? Granted, most of us do not know him from Adam, it would have been intersting to hear what he had to say.

11:28 PM, November 05, 2006

ezekiel said...

junior, Ditto.....

In the World a lot of things wind up on company credit cards that pass the accounting priciple/IRS test every day. But that is a long way from moral or scripturally good stewardship. What we have heard so far is mostly that, Accounting principle. Remember, Chip told us to trust him...

But all this is just the smoke. The real fire is the blowback that is written and documented from our Deacons and Ministers. We don't have to speculate and we don't have to ask for proof/evidence of evil among us, we have first hand documented evidence from their letters and emails. No one including the leadership is acting on it. The only thing you have seen is an extended meeting of the deacons where it is obviouos that they were told to silence themselves. What a sad state of affairs.

phil413 said...

My credit card thoughts. (FWIW)
I continue to hear and read issues as it pertains to improper use of credit cards. There was a meeting last week involving 7 men, all receipts and documentation from the Pastor's card were reviewed. There were men present who have had sincere issues with the way these issues have been handled. One such man that I know, trust and love very much, he was satisfied that there was no improper use of credit cards. The same documentation was presented to the entire deacon body this past Sunday. After both of these meetings everyone was in aggrement that there were no discrepancies and the documentation by the pastor was correct and "above board". There are still statements being made re: credit cards even after proof has been provided to our deacon body. If anyone has proof as it regards improper use of a credit card then let him or her bring it forth. Untill that happens any statements regarding this subject is harming the body of Christ. It is also causing division and quite frankly harming credibility to anyone who professses to be a "truthseeker"
Phil. 4:13
David Matlock

Truth Hunter said...

Phil413,

I only posted what I was told by a deacon who was there. I found it incredible, so I asked if others had heard it as well. I wanted another angle on it.

I either have to believe the deacon who spoke Sunday night or a deacon I have known personally for 20 years. What should I do?

I know for a fact the deacons are not united on this. What are the odds I spoke to the lone doubter?

He also told me the meeting Sunday was contentious and some deacons walked out. That doesn't sound like a unified bunch to me.

Reporting truth is not sewing division. The division is already there.

Tim said...

In another string I made mention of the credit card issue. This one always seemed to me to be of minor importance. Not because financial infidelity would have been ok, but because it is an issue that quite frankly would be difficult if not impossible to bring into the light with out an informant on the inside. Whether, there is any thing there or not, we are faced with either believing what we are told or not believing it. It is that simple.

I do believe that the credit card issue has been used as a "smoke and mirror" tactic to redirect attention away from the things that are known.

For example:

We know that we were directly and intentionally misled by our pastor concerning the Wednesday night services.

We know that there are deacons within our church that have offered the door to those that had questions.

We know that there are staff members in positions of authority that have exhibited childish and ungodly behavior.

We know that some of our most trusted and dedicated leaders are no longer on staff.

We know that there is a need for reconciliation, restoration, and healing.

phil413 said...

Truthhunter & Tim,
I agree that there are many issues other than the credit card that need to be answered. The point I was making that untill someone comes forward with solid proof that there was some misuse this should be a dead issue. I, like you have heard the accusations but untill someone brings proof forward it should be a dead issue.
I believe it hurts the credibility of everyone that has legitimate concerns.
Phil. 4:13
David Matlock

Tim said...

David,

I am in agreement with you in the credit card issue has become a dead issue.

It appears to me that it is being used as diversion from other serious issues.

I personally would like to see it dropped altogether unless there is someone with rock solid proof.

There are issues that are indisputable that need to be addressed and we would be far better served to concentrate on them.

phil413 said...

Bro. Tim,
Amen, I couldn't agree more nor said it better.
God Bless,
David

stillwaitingandwatching said...

Tim,

Press Here!

Tim said...

stillwaitingandwatching,

thank you for the support.

I hope that you and others are familar with the "Home Improvement" tv show, because otherwise there might be a Tim "Taylor" at Bellevue that is going to be in serious trouble.

And also, "Beulah Land", that is, like a pseudo name ...right...

StumblingServant said...

Per Savingbellevue.com, as a result of Sunday night's added after-service meeting, all the active deacons are being required to sign a pledge of confidence and show a stand up sign of support during an upcoming Sunday morning service. What do they plan to do to any deacons that cannot/will not sign?

Tim said...

CONCERNING THE PLEDGE OF ALLIEGIENCE TO THE PASTOR

I know that there a few deacons who read these post daily, perhaps more than I am aware of.

Your alliegience belongs to no man. Your alliegience belongs to Christ and his church. There is absolutely no Biblical mandate that require or supports such a pledge.

The apostle Paul when faced with those that wanted pledge as his followers told them directly that Apollos planted and Paul watered but God provided the increase. It was also Paul that told the church follow me as I follow Christ. If Paul would not accept the alliegience of followers then by what right does Dr. Gaines have to do so.

I WILL PERSONALLY CONSIDER THIS AS HIGH TREASON AGAINST THE THRONE OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH.

I ALSO WILL CONSIDER THAT OUR CONGREGATION NEEDS TO BE IMMEDIATELY CALLED INTO A BUSINESS MEETING, DISMISS ANY DEACONS WHO SWEAR THERE ALLIEGIENCE TO ANYONE OTHER THAN CHRIST JESUS AND BEGIN REPLACING THEM WITH GODLY, GOD FEARING MEN.

THIS IS WRONG. FLAT WRONG. BLATANTLY WRONG. AND ABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE THAT IT WAS APPROVED BY OUR DEACON BODY.

WHEN THE CHURCH IS NO LONGER STRIVES TO BE A REFLECTION OF CHRIST, THEN THE CHURCH NO LONGER HAS A PURPOSE FOR EXSISTENCE.

THESE ARE DESPERATE TIMES.

Anonymous said...

Tim said...
CONCERNING THE PLEDGE OF ALLIEGIENCE TO THE PASTOR


No such thing exists, as has been noted in the applicable thread.

I WILL PERSONALLY CONSIDER THIS AS HIGH TREASON AGAINST THE THRONE OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST AND HIS CHURCH.

Treason, Tim, is a capital offense. What does your "personal consideration" entail, exactly? Do you plan some sort of punishment or condemnation of those you find guilty?

I ALSO WILL CONSIDER THAT OUR CONGREGATION NEEDS TO BE IMMEDIATELY CALLED INTO A BUSINESS MEETING, DISMISS ANY DEACONS WHO SWEAR THERE ALLIEGIENCE TO ANYONE OTHER THAN CHRIST JESUS AND BEGIN REPLACING THEM WITH GODLY, GOD FEARING MEN.

Are you questioning the salvation of those who disagree with your viewpoint?

THIS IS WRONG. FLAT WRONG. BLATANTLY WRONG. AND ABSOLUTELY UNBELIEVABLE THAT IT WAS APPROVED BY OUR DEACON BODY.

Were it as some anti-Bellevue types have portrayed it, yes, it would be wrong.

It isn't.

WHEN THE CHURCH IS NO LONGER STRIVES TO BE A REFLECTION OF CHRIST, THEN THE CHURCH NO LONGER HAS A PURPOSE FOR EXSISTENCE.

So you, personally, judge a church where the deacons commit to being servants of God and to freeing the pastor to attend to other duties no longer fit to exist? Do I understand you correctly?

THESE ARE DESPERATE TIMES.

It's been said that desperate times call for desperate measures, Tim. Is that what you're attempting to communicate? And if so, what sort of desperate measures do you propose?

--Mike

Tim said...

Mike,

Before I begin answering your questions, there a just a couple of things that I would like to point out.

The first being that you and I are not nearly so different as some would think. I believe that in some regards we are very similar.

The second is that I have tried and I emphasize tried because I can not claim that I have always been 100% sucessful, to remain civil with all who have directed toward me.

Thirdly and finally, I have not participated in dragging all the names of deacons that I both know and have spoke with around and personally attacked them. I have poked a jab your direction on occassion and I apologize for that, most of the time it has been meaningless fun, not all the time however and I recognize and apologize for the times when it was not.

Now on to the matters at hand.
Treason would certainly disqualify one from service, so the punishment would be removal from office.

In regards to questioning anyones salvation, I confess that it is not my responsiblity to do so. I would challenge anyone who pledges alliegence to any man to question their own. We are commanded to be subjects of Christ and Christ alone.

Regarding the way in which this is viewed. I have looked at this and tried to understand, how it is possible that several, perhaps more of the deacon body came up with this idea and thought that it was a good one. I believe that they are sincere in that, however, to say that those in attendance unanimously decided that all are unaniamous is absurd. Does this mean they are unanimous or else they are dismissed?

I personally judge a church that has no reflection of Christ and no desire to be a reflection of Christ to have no reason for exsistence.

Yes, these are desperate times. Our Church is being destroyed from within, not because you and I disagree or even because Mark Sharpe and Dr. Gaines disagree. Rather it is our inability to disagree in a manner that is Christ like (You, I, Mark Shapre and yes, even Dr. Gaines) and when confronted with our short comings or failure or sin (to use the Biblical term) confess it to one another and ask for forgiveness from one another. For some it has become more about winning and losing and that is wrong.
However, with that being said, it should be known that there are matters of doctrine in which there is no room for compromise and to those that have been around Bellevue for a period of time those should be self evident.

Anonymous said...

Tim said... Treason would certainly disqualify one from service, so the punishment would be removal from office.

As I mentioned previously, Tim, treason is a capital crime. Capital crimes are crimes punishable by death, not by removal from office. No doubt you didn't intend to make that inference, but it is there nonetheless.

In regards to questioning anyones salvation, I confess that it is not my responsiblity to do so. I would challenge anyone who pledges alliegence to any man to question their own. We are commanded to be subjects of Christ and Christ alone.

When insisting that certain people be replaced with "GODLY, GOD FEARING MEN," the implication is that the certain people to whom you refer are un-Godly men who do not fear God.

And I completely agree that we, as Christians, are "subjects of Christ and Christ alone." The deacon affirmation does absolutely nothing which disagrees with that.

Regarding the way in which this is viewed. I have looked at this and tried to understand, how it is possible that several, perhaps more of the deacon body came up with this idea and thought that it was a good one. I believe that they are sincere in that, however, to say that those in attendance unanimously decided that all are unaniamous is absurd. Does this mean they are unanimous or else they are dismissed?

Good question. Let me ask you one in return, if I might. Have you ever heard of a "dissident deacon"?

I personally judge a church that has no reflection of Christ and no desire to be a reflection of Christ to have no reason for exsistence.

Bellevue Baptist Church is not such a church.

However, with that being said, it should be known that there are matters of doctrine in which there is no room for compromise and to those that have been around Bellevue for a period of time those should be self evident.

That pretty much didn't answer my question, Tim. Again, what sort of desperate measures are you and yours proposing?

--Mike

Tim said...

Mike,

The questions that you asked were indeed answered. It might be that you are seeking clarification, but I believe that I was fairly direct. Perhaps you might clarify what it is that you are asking. Again, I am a simple man and you must forgive my lack of understanding your inquiries.

The final question that you had, I unintentionally omitted, but do you not believe that removing a portion of deacons and appointing others into these positions of authority would not be desperate.

Anonymous said...

Tim said...
Mike,

The questions that you asked were indeed answered. It might be that you are seeking clarification, but I believe that I was fairly direct. Perhaps you might clarify what it is that you are asking. Again, I am a simple man and you must forgive my lack of understanding your inquiries.

The final question that you had, I unintentionally omitted, but do you not believe that removing a portion of deacons and appointing others into these positions of authority would not be desperate.


Tim, you labeled these "desperate times." If you label these as desperate times, then you must advocate desperate measures.

What are they, if you don't mind my asking again?

--Mike

Anonymous said...

"Any foolishness packaged in pleasantry is still a waist of time."

Tim said...

Mike,
Replace .... deacons .... that
... will .... not .... fulfill
.... their .... responsibilities
.... to .... the .... church
.... with .... those .... that .... will.

I .... thought .... perhaps
.... if .... I .... wrote .... it .... a.... bit .... slower .... that .... you .... might .... get .... it.

Anonymous said...

Tim said...
Mike,
Replace .... deacons .... that
... will .... not .... fulfill
.... their .... responsibilities
.... to .... the .... church
.... with .... those .... that .... will.

I .... thought .... perhaps
.... if .... I .... wrote .... it .... a.... bit .... slower .... that .... you .... might .... get .... it.


Evidently, there's a contest to see which anti-Bellevue backer can be the most provocative; perhaps the winner receives a pair of front-row seats to the "Showdown" next Sunday morning, hmm?

Removing oxymoronic "dissident deacons" isn't anything out of the ordinary, and it isn't something that would be conducted by anti-Bellevue individuals. Deacons, by definition, support the pastor of a church; if a deacon is unwilling to do so, the deacon should voluntarily separate himself from active service until he can comfortably support his pastor, rather than wait to be removed from active status.

As someone affiliated with the "SB" group, Tim, you have defined these as desperate times. Since the "SB" group would be the last to want to see so-called "dissident deacons" removed from their position--and are not even in a position to remove anyone from anything--you had to have been referring to something else.

If you don't wish to share, I understand completely.

--Mike

Anonymous said...

I'm bringing this over to the appropriate thread.

Are there any more thoughts or solid information on this?

deceivedagain said...

It is now confirmed that Steve Gaines did use the Bellevue credit card to pay for his daughter's birthday party at Colonial Country Club.

The men who reviewed the American Express bill confirmed that it did happen. The church said Steve Gaines paid it back. I'd like to see when the charge was made and when the pastor's reimbursement was made.

More developing on other charges.....

8:04 AM, November 12, 2006


Andrew said...

deceivedagain,

The communications committee told me that...

...Steve tried to pay for the bill himself and was not allowed to by the Club, just like he had done previously.

...the Club didn't take his personal credit card.

...it was direct billed to the church.

... Steve reimbursed the church for his daughter's party.


I understood that a credit card was not involved, but rather an invoice type of billing was used. If you find out differently, please let me know and I will return to the committee in order to clear up and revisit our prior conversation. There is no room for misunderstanding in my conversation with them.

*

9:05 AM, November 12, 2006

mostlylurkin said...

Unless things have changed, since I was a member, Colonial CC does not accept any form of payment outside the monthly billing to be paid by the owner of the membership. Also they did not offer corporate or company memberships, only individuals.

In addition to the monthly dues, there is a quarterly minimum purchase requirement.

BR said...

mostly,
The DO offer corporate memberships bc my corporation has one. And they DO bill directly and take individual credit cards as well.

Anonymous said...

Every question about the credit card issues has been answered and more than once. there are many that will NEVER be satisfied no matter what and that is trully sad. Not only are there no questionable charges, but Brother Steve has gone above and beyond from day one to make sure of that. There are some that have even talked to the Commucations Committee and have been given detailed answers and they are still not satisfied it is the "truth".

I find it sad that some would rather put their faith in rumors, gossip, slander and out right un-truths.

Yes, there are some hurting and they need to be comforted. There are also those that seem to be enjoying this. Actions speak volumes.

Tim said...

HisServant,

So are you saying the things that are stated here are not true or do you know?

Anonymous said...

most of the things on this entire site are not true and yes I know. there is a VERY simple explanation to 99% of the things on tghis site. like I have said, those that have true concerns can get answers to those concerns. i am not talking about music style and all the other many personal preference issues. I am taking about true concerns. go get the answers.

Tim said...

HisServant,

If you have them, why not give them. You are here and I am here.

Tim said...

HisServant,

Your reference to personal preference issues leads me to believe that you are unaware of what issues have been raised. I have heard this canned remark from more than one of our deacons.

Anonymous said...

I know every issue that has been raised. I never said all of them were personal preferences, but some are.

whynotask said...

To hisservant
ANSWER THIS! Mark D. told two men in great detail about Dr. Steve's dream. Dr. Steve say's there was no dream. Who's dream was this? Are the two men dreaming together. Is Mark dreaming this up or what is the real answer to this dream? Put all these men in the same room and get to the Truth! That would be a good start to clearing out the dreams we are all having.